Opposing Domains

[ocato]

Opposing Domains: The Good and Evil domains, and the Law and Chaos domains are in opposition, so no character should have both Good Devotion and Evil Devotion (or both Law Devotion and Chaos Devotion). In some cases, you might decide that the Healing and Death domains oppose each other, and likewise Destruction and Protection. The Fire domain does not necessarily oppose Water, nor does Air conflict with Earth, since many nature deities (such as Obad-Hai) grant access to all the elemental domains

A friend of mine (who is considering DMing a game) and I have been having an interesting argument concerning this line from the Complete Champion regarding Opposing Domains and the Domain Feats. More importantly, we're arguing disagreeing about whether or not this has any relevance to a Cleric's choice of domains based on their deity. My friend believes that choosing domains needs to follow a basic system such as this. However, I believe that any two domains offered by a deity are inherently close enough in mentality that they should be allowed in the same character. Obviously homebrewing Deities who offer both Law and Chaos or Good and Evil as domains should be done with an extremely good reason (or not at all).

Usually, domain feats go together only if they correspond to the domains offered by the deity you follow. For example, Kord grants access to the Chaos, Good, Luck, and Strength domains, so a worshiper of Kord could choose the Chaos Devotion, Good Devotion, Luck Devotion, or Strength Devotion feats without going outside his deity’s sphere of influence.

However, he seems to stalwartly believe that no cleric should be allowed to take two domains that are "obviously against each other" such as Protection and Destruction, Death and Healing, or the Elemental domains mentioned in the above quote. Now, while I agree that domain selection should be monitored by the DM and that thematic choices should trump homebrewing Jeff the God of Biscuits who just so happens to have the two Domains you want, I find his slant on the argument a little bit oppressive. He has gone through the domains and picked out those he claims to be "opposing." Here's a brief list and his explanation

Chaos and War: You cannot wage war without organization
Knowledge and Trickery: Clear Opposites, since they boil down to Fact and Fiction
Plant and Animal: Clear Opposites, Animals eat plants
Good and Trickery: Deception is not a good act
Destruction and Protection: One or the other, you can't do both
Destruction and Law: Law builds the foundations of societies, it doesn't tear them down

and... well, the list goes on. While I really appreciate this person trying to avoid power-gaming in the upcoming session, I really think he's gone overboard. How can I convince him that his logic is faulty without insulting him?

[SurlySeraph]

Try giving him some examples of faults in his argument. For example:

Chaos and War: You cannot wage war without organization

Tell the orcs that. Go ahead, just try to tell them.

Knowledge and Trickery: Clear Opposites, since they boil down to Fact and Fiction

Isn't it easier to trick people if you know what they're inclined to believe? If you know about human nature? If you know what they'll think is plausible?

Plant and Animal: Clear Opposites, Animals eat plants

Carnivorous plants. Parisitic fungus. Slime molds. Things aren't that clear cut. Plant/Animal opposed with Death I can see, but "Animals and plants are relatively closely related" is basic biology. Look up the difference between eukaryotes and prokaryotes; at the most basic level, animals have more in common with plants than with many carnivorous microorganisms.

Good and Trickery: Deception is not a good act

Tell that to Robin Hood, or to any other Chaotic Good character. Hell, tell that to any good character who uses stealth. I'll accept "Trickery is opposed to Law" (though many bureaucracies contradict that), but this is ridiculous.

Destruction and Protection: One or the other, you can't do both

I accept this houserule.

Destruction and Law: Law builds the foundations of societies, it doesn't tear them down

Executing criminals is an act of destruction. Tearing down a condemned building is lawful and destructive. Lawful deities (e.g. St. Cuthbert) support the destruction of chaotic things.

[DarknessLord]

Destruction and Law: Law builds the foundations of societies, it doesn't tear them down

Oh come on, it could be argued that society doesn't destroy itself (hint: it does), bu society is more then happy to destroy OTHER societies.

[Nerd-o-rama]

I approve of his goal of stymying power gaming, but this is taking it too far. Disallowing Good and Evil, Law and Chaos, or opposite elements, maybe (although they can make sense depending on the deity). This list, though...

Chaos and War: You cannot wage war without organization

[Zen Koan]But war leads to chaos[/Zen Koan]. Then there's evil or trickster deities that encourage war for the sake of disrupting society.

Knowledge and Trickery: Clear Opposites, since they boil down to Fact and Fiction

Um, no. First, a counterexample in the trickster deities of many pagan mythologies, who represent knowledge but disperse it in a trickster-y fashion. Second, the Knowledge domain is about knowing things, secrets, and the Trickery domain is about keeping things you do know a secret, as well as finding out others. Pretty sure Vecna has both domains.

Plant and Animal: Clear Opposites, Animals eat plants

You have got to be making this up. What about a nature priest/deity that covers both animals and plants? Pretty sure Obad-hai and possibly Ehlonna have both domains

Good and Trickery: Deception is not a good act

The basic tenets of the Chaotic Good alignment disagree, as do I'm fairly sure several canon deities.

Destruction and Protection: One or the other, you can't do both

That actually makes some sense, but not all Destruction or Protection is meant to be universal.

Destruction and Law: Law builds the foundations of societies, it doesn't tear them down

I frankly don't see how these relate at all. Also, PHB counterexample: Bane.

Just some ideas for counterarguments.


EDIT: All this and no nerfing of the Travel domain feat? Or hell, the Travel domain? Seriously?

[Rei_Jin]

I think that Gruumsh would disagree that you can't wage a war with Chaos. War, by nature, IS chaotic. Otherwise, friendly fire wouldn't exist.

I understand what he's saying, but the gods are based on their followers, NOT the other way around. And if we just take humans as an example, they are full of internal conflict and opposition. They seem to be able to hold two things in balance, for example, the desire to protect life, yet the desire to kill those who threaten them. But when you look closer, it isn't always (and generally isn't) actually an internal opposition. The two are inter-related. You want to PROTECT the lives of your people, and yet you want to DESTROY the ones trying to kill you all.

It's not necessarily about opposition, more about balance.

[drengnikrafe]

You simply point out the contradictions in his ideas.

Chaos and War can go together. You can wage war by sending 500000 people at a tiny nation without any sort of organization and expect to win. Furthermore, chaotic doesn't necessarily say lack of logic, it suggests... well... unstructured.

Knowledge and Trickery: You can use the knowledge you have in something to pass yourself off as an expert at it. This is trickery, but through knowledge.

Plant and Animal: Both living beings. If his logic "because animals eat plans" stands, then you can't take Animal at all, because it contradicts with itself.

Good and Trickery: Deception is not a good act, but you can use trickery for the greater good. Pretend that you side with the Orcs to gain their help so they fight alongside you in a battle. This is trickery, but it's for good.

Desctruction and Protection: In order to 'protect' object A (for instance, a princess) you must 'destroy' object B (for instance, a conspiritor). Or, to protect the planet, you must destory harmful machinery.

Law and Destruction: When you destroy something, the bad way is to throw a bomb at it. The good way is to make sure you don't also destroy nearby structures, and take it apart non-violently, maybe using the pieces for something else. This is Lawful.


So, just use examples for how they go together wonderfully. I can't justify Good & Evil, or Law & Chaos because they CAN'T go together, but argue that as long as you can justify how two things go together, and thus are not EXACT opposites, they CAN go together.


EDIT: And before I finish my post, 3 other people come in with simular ideas...

To you, who posted this thing... I think you understand by now the ideas we have.

[Kyeudo]

Your friend doesn't think outside the box much. It's easy to make fluff logically meet mechanics.

and... well, the list goes on. While I really appreciate this person trying to avoid power-gaming in the upcoming session, I really think he's gone overboard. How can I convince him that his logic is faulty without insulting him?

Have you tried pointing out logical deities that could have those supposedly opposing domains?

Chaos and War: A god representing the fortunes of war. A stray shot takes out a messenger, a sudden rain storm turns a field into a swamp, or a few days clear weather in the middle of winter can easily turn a loss into a win and all are unpredictable.

Knowledge and Trickery: A god of secrets. He knows much, but hides that knowledge behind deceptions.

Plant and Animal: A god of nature. He represents wildlife, both flora and fauna.

Good and Trickery: A god of practical jokes. He doesn't want to hurt people, just make them laugh.

Destruction and Protection: A racial deity. Protection to his people and destruction to their foes.

Destruction and Law: A god of retribution. For every law their is a punishment.

[Dr Bwaa]

Your friend has an exceptionally strange concept of "opposites." I don't need to elaborate on this any more than everyone else already has. I agree that the best way to convince him of this is by offering any of the many examples that are already here.

By the way--chaos and war? Come on! These guys have said that they can go together--I don't think it's possible to have war without chaos!

[ocato]

Admittedly Protection and Destruction was the main one we were talking about. The others were him flipping out examples to back himself up that I honestly don't think he'll stand by tomorrow. I got a little side-tracked in the post and I left that part out. I apologize to you (and I'll apologize to him if he ever finds this site). I tried to describe to him the idea that Protection and Destruction are practically the same thing, since in order to protect one thing, you often have to destroy something else (or prepare to destroy it). For example, you build a wall with garrisons and archers and gates and a portcullis to protect your city, but what you are really doing is preparing to destroy an invader. Destroying something is almost always some form of protection, be it preemptive or clear. You kill a man because he is threatening to hurt you or your interests. You destroy a village of goblins to prevent them from raiding the farms across the river. He said that I was using zen baloney to try to make a point that didn't stand. I also suggested St. Cuthbert, one of the more known deities in the standard pantheon, and he suggested that since Cuthbert is lawful neutral, one had to decide whether to follow him via protection (good) or destruction (evil). The fact that St. Cuthbert specifically does not allow evil followers was unanswered and dismissed out of hand.

I honestly think he's lost his faith in his argument, I was just looking for a few ways to make sure he agrees with me instead of just acquiescing.

[drengnikrafe]

Ahh... that clears things up a little.

In any case, I think if he won't agree to your "in order to protect, one must destroy" idea, there is another angle you could go for it at. On occasion, one must destroy that which (s)he is protecting in order to protect it.
Kind of obscure example: In Tales of Phantasia, Suzu must destroy her parents (who she was looking for, and hoping to protect) in order to protect Cress. Her parents also wished destruction upon themselves, dispite that they were protecting themselves in order to protect Suzu, but only because they had been kind-of brainwashed, and thus the only way to free them from their destruction which would halt their protection was destruction.... if you follow me.
Granted, it's not as good as the point you already had, but it is another arguement that you should be able to do it.

[The_Snark]

I could see not wanting someone to have both Protection and Destruction, although it's not an airtight argument. I had a cleric with the Life (Eberron setting) and Death domains once, for example, who held death as simply another, very important part of life. (Admittedly, I didn't get a lot of use out of some of the Death domain's spells, on account of being good-aligned.) There's plenty of uses even for flat-out contradicting domains, especially with dualistic faiths.

And to expand on Kyeudo's list above: Gruumsh and Erthynul have Chaos and War, Vecna and Boccob have Knowledge and Trickery, Obad-hai and Ehlonna both have Animal and Plant (Obad-hai gets all elemental domains in addition, even "opposing" ones), Garl Glittergold has Good and Trickery, St. Cuthbert and Hextor both have Destruction and Law. All core deities; you've already brought up St. Cuthbert in defense of Protection and Destruction, I see.

[Hal]

Isn't St. Cuthbert both Law and Destruction?

[Nerd-o-rama]

Also, the Protection domain and the Destruction domain aren't inherently "Good" and "Evil" respectively. Otherwise they'd call them the Good domain and the Evil domain.

Anyway, St. Cuthbert's whole deal is "Protect the Good, Destroy the Evil". I see nothing contradictory there. Incidentally, he's Lawful Neutral because he and his followers are willing to go into more morally questionable territory to destroy Evil than the LG deities are.

[Magnor Criol]

Actually, Vecna doesn't have trickery, unless there's been a change somewhere. Boccob has both, though.

In the last game I played in, one of the other players played a cleric dedicated to the idea of healing or medicine or something along those lines, and had the Healing and Death domains. They actually fit quite well thematically, if you think on it; someone who serves regularly in a medical position would both know death and healing well.

[The_Snark]

Uh...

... you know, the only excuse I can think of for Vecna, god of secrets and intrigue, not having the Trickery domain is that he somehow managed to trick WotC into leaving it out of the published version so that people don't suspect him of deceiving them.

[Ascension]

Anyway, St. Cuthbert's whole deal is "Protect the Good, Destroy the Evil". I see nothing contradictory there. Incidentally, he's Lawful Neutral because he and his followers are willing to go into more morally questionable territory to destroy Evil than the LG deities are.

And this is why I <3 Cuthbert. He's perfect for that vigilante-who-goes-too-far sort of character. But I digress...

...more on topic, I actually think it would be quite fun to homebrew some contradictory deities, but that may just be my love of paradox speaking. I could see a True Neutral deity offering Law and Chaos or Good and Evil as a set, although s/he wouldn't want his/her clerics taking, for instance, Law and Good or Chaos and Evil, as that would be unbalanced.

[Xyk]

I am not gonna add anything useful because that's been covered many times over, but I am gonna say the Chaos=/= war thing reminded me of Cao Ren from Dynasty Warriors and really all of them trying to "end the chaos of war". War is often entirely in Chaos except for the high powers who are generally fairly organized. Or at least, effective War and chaos do not go together all too well, but again, tell that to gruumsh and his orcs.

[Starsinger]

Chaos and War: You cannot wage war without organization
Knowledge and Trickery: Clear Opposites, since they boil down to Fact and Fiction
Plant and Animal: Clear Opposites, Animals eat plants
Good and Trickery: Deception is not a good act
Destruction and Protection: One or the other, you can't do both
Destruction and Law: Law builds the foundations of societies, it doesn't tear them down

Oh I wanna play!

Chaos and War: Really? Cuz uhh... I'm pretty sure half the Blood War is fought by Chaotic creatures.
Knowledge and Trickery: Before you can effectively lie, you have to know what's the truth.
Plant and Animal: The best way of throwing this in his face is by quoting what was said about Nature deities offering fire and water.
Good and Trickery: I'm pretty sure the abominable Book of Ed says otherwise.
Destruction and Protection: A weapon is both the power to destroy and the power to protect.
Destruction and Law: Well, Devils are destructive and lawful.

[BlueWizard]

Blue Wizard's Comments:

Some of the reasons your DM made do not make sense to me. I am one to say no good and evil, or other wierd mixes, and have DM'd over 20 years.

But this one pisses me off:
Knowledge and Trickery:
It takes knowledge to be a trickster!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also:
Plant and Animal: These two are the nature of Druidism, and several Asian type religions! Shove that in his face.
Destruction and Protection/Law: Some Hindu gods should get these domains.



There should be logical use of the domains, but not illogical domain bans. Some of these are likely very unreasonable, and caused by your DM's personal life choices.

[Borris]

Just for fun, and for the sake of wasting time, let's find a list of deities that have one of those pairs of "opposed" domains.

Chaos and War: You cannot wage war without organization
Corellon Larethian, CG creator god of elves
Gruumsh, CE creator god of orcs
Erythnul, CE god of slaughter
Ares, CE Olympian god of war and strife
Bast, CG Egyptian goddess of cats and vengeance
Sif, CG Asgardian goddess of war and dueling
Thor, CG Asgardian god of storms, thuinder, and war
Haela Brightaxe, CG dwarven goddess of luck in battle
Hanseath, CN dwarven god of war, carousing, and alcohol
Selvetarm, CE drow god of warriors
Shevarash, CN elven god of revenge and hatred of the drow
Solonor Thelandira, CG elven god of archery and hunting
Stronmaus, CG giant god of the sky and weather, cloud and strom giants
Thrym, CE giant god of cold, magic, and frost giants
Vaprak, CE god of violence, destruction, and ogres
Hruggek, CE goblin god of ambush and bugbears
Tempus, CN Faerûnian god of war
Garagos, CN Faerûnian god of war, destruction, and plunder
Uthgar, CN Faerûnian patron god of the Uthgardt barbarians
Dol Dorn, Eberron god of strength at arms
Anhur, CG Mulhorandi god of war and storms
Beltar, CE Greyhawk goddess of caves and malice
Phaulkon, CG Greyhawk god of wind, birds, and archery
Tezcatlipoca, CE Greyhawk god of night, scheming, and betrayal
Chislev, N Krynn godess of nature
Merrshaulk, CE sarrukh god of predators

Knowledge and Trickery: Clear Opposites, since they boil down to Fact and Fiction
Memnor, NE giant god of pride and control
Sseth, CE god of yuan-ti
Oghma, N Faerûnian god of knowledge and bards
Boccob, N Greyhawk god of magic and arcane knowledge
Grankhul, Greyhawk goblin god of hunting and stealth
Mouqol, N Greyhawk god of trade and negotiation
Syrul, NE Greyhawk goddess of lies and deceit
Xan Yae, N Greyhawk god of stealth and shadows
Zagyg, CN Greyhawk god of humor and unpredictability
Zilchus, LN Greyhawk god of prestige and influence

Plant and Animal: Clear Opposites, Animals eat plants
Elonha, NG goddess of woodlands
Obad-Hai, N god of nature
Artemis, NG Olympian goddess of hunting and childbirth
Thard Harr, CG dwarven god of wild dwarves and jungle
Fenmarel Mestarine, CN elven god of outcasts
Baervan Wildwanderer, NG gnome god of forests
Skerrit, NG god of centaurs
Semuanya, N god of lizardfolk
Hiatea, NG giant goddess of nature and childbirth
Chauntea, NG Faerûnian goddess of agriculture
Gwaeron Windstrom, NG Faerûnian god of tracking
Mielikki, NG Faerûnian goddess of forests
Silvanus, N Faerûnian god of nature
Beory, N Greyhawk goddess of nature
Breeka, N Greyhawk goddess of living things
Gadhelyn, CN Greyhawk elven god of independance, outlawry, and hunting
Tlazoteotl, N Greyhawk goddess of agriculture
M'daess, NG sarrukh goddess of purification
Merrshaulk, CE sarrukh god of predators
Duthila, N raptoran goddess of autumn, hunting, and abundance
Kithin, N raptoran god of winter, death, and barrenness
Nilthina, N raptoran god of summer, warmth, and growth
Ventila, N raptoran goddess of srping, love, and fertility

Good and Trickery: Deception is not a good act
Garl Glittergold, NG creator god of gnomes
Odin, NG Asgardian god of knowledge, magic, and war
Alobal Lorfiril, CG elven god
Baravar Cloakshadow, NG gnome god of illusions
Sharess, CG Faerûnian goddess of hedonism
Dalt, CG Greyhawk god of doors, locks, and keys
Johydee, NG Greyhawk goddess of espionage
Branchala, CG Krynn god of music and poetry

Destruction and Protection: One or the other, you can't do both
St. Cuthbert, LN god of retribution
Bast, CG Egyptian goddess of cats and vengeance
Lendys, LN dragon god of justice
Shekinester, N god of nagas
Camazotz, CE Greyhawk god of bats, vampires, and the underworld

Destruction and Law: Law builds the foundations of societies, it doesn't tear them down
Hextor, LE god of tyranny
St. Cuthbert, LN god of retribution
Tiamat, LE goddess of greed and evil dragons
Lendys, LN dragon god of justice
Bane, LE Faerûnian god of fear and tyranny
Gendwar Argrim, LN Greyhawk dwarven god of fatalism and obsession
Katay, LN Greyhawk god of decay, inevitability, order, and time
Vathris, LN Greyhawk god of anguish, lost causes, and revenge

[Dr Bwaa]

Just for fun, and for the sake of wasting time, let's find a list of deities that have one of those pairs of "opposed" domains.

*HUGE %!@#ING LIST!!!*

...

Exactly how much time did you waste?

[Fiendish_Dire_Moose]

Well, Demogorgon, Orcus, Graz'zt, Malchontet etc... And ALL OF THE REST OF THE ABYSS would agree that war most certainly CAN be waged without law present.

[Edea]

'Bout the only problem I'd have with Domains from a player would be if they tried to cross Planar Domain choices with regular ones on the same character (unless, of course, everybody in the campaign world was doin' it :P ).

They could even have Good and Evil simultaneously afaiac; hell, Ardents are capable of that right out of the box (though those aren't exactly DOMAINS, more like Mantles, but still I think it's a similar concept, unless the game world in question insists on deity-worship). As for explaining those choices, roleplaying will get you just about anywhere if done well enough.

[BobVosh]

I'm willing to go a step further. I say a cleric can have both Good/Evil and Law/Chaos. It is simple, neutrality worshippers see the value in both or at least a proper balance.

As for the rest, see the stuff above.

Personal note: Animal/Plant pisses me off the most. Animals eat animals, are they opposites? Animals and plants are practically the same.

*edit* Anyone noticed the only "good" (as in powergaming wise) domain lost is trickery?

[Keld Denar]

Hanseath, CN dwarven god of war, carousing, and alcohol

Wait...isn't this like, EVERY dwarven god? Is this the dwarven OVERGOD? Must be....

[Allene]

Wait...isn't this like, EVERY dwarven god? Is this the dwarven OVERGOD? Must be....

No, there's also Moradin, the Dwarven God of Smithing, War, and Alcohol, and the True Dwarven Overgod:

Dwarf: God of Dwarves, Smithing, Tunnels, Mining, War, Alcohol, Carousing, And Beards. Also Beards.

The reason he is called Dwarf is of course because they know not his name or gender, or really anything, except that somewhere in the Dwarven Cosmos, there is a giant Beard, and sometimes smithed goods and something that might be song comes out, and sometimes mined materials and alcohol go in.

[Fiendish_Dire_Moose]

Didn't Moradin CREATE the dwarves?

[Nargrakhan]

Chaos and War: You cannot wage war without organization

Chaos and War?

Blood for the Blood God!

[Curmudgeon]

Oh, heck, let's open this up. I once approved a Cleric of the principle of Balance, with the requirement that they could only take opposing domains in pairs together, each pair counting as one domain. Law and Chaos, Good and Evil, Fire and Water, or Earth and Air from the core lists; lots of other combos, like Cavern and Sky, from all the other domains. I used the Cloistered Cleric as the base, but instead of all the Knowledge stuff they got Balance (Spell Compendium page 271) as their only unpaired domain. I threw in Spontaneous Domain Casting (Players Handbook II page 37): lose the ability to spontaneously cast cure spells, and cast Balance domain spells instead. Strict neutral alignment requirement, of course.

The domain powers of these opposites tend not to be too powerful. The biggest boosts are from the elemental domains, and only work to turn/rebuke specific types of creatures. And while the domain spells provide lots of extra flexibility, the limitation of only 1 domain spell per level keeps things reasonable.

The PC who used this Cleric of Balance in my game ended up taking Domain Spontaneity 4 or 5 times. The result was something like a Mystic Theurge: lots of spell variety, but no significant power boost.

D&D is a game. The object is to have fun. I can't see how throwing in extra restrictions on Cleric mindsets can be fun.

[Tengu_temp]

I'm willing to go a step further. I say a cleric can have both Good/Evil and Law/Chaos. It is simple, neutrality worshippers see the value in both or at least a proper balance.

As I said many times before and will probably say many times in the future, the AD&D True Neutral "I balance each good act with an evil one of the same magnitude, and vice versa" is actually evil deluding himself into thinking he's neutral.